To git or not to git

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
34 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

To git or not to git

Benny Malengier
Nick,

Can you create an overview of the result of the poll? You send a list of committers off line, did most react?

Going over the poll, it seems git would have a clear majority. Nevertheless, before moving, somebody should look into moving where? So SF or another place.
And other work involved. Impact?

As you volunteered, I will give you the task. A start would be to become admin on SF, you ok with that? As Doug and John offered their help, don't hesitate to take them up on it.

Greetings,
Benny

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Nick Hall-6
The poll results were as follows:

git - 8 (61.5%)    svn - 2 (15.4%)     Don't mind - 3 (23.1%)

We have already started to look into the impact of moving.

I'll also investigate alternative hosting options.  I don't mind
becoming an admin on SF.

Nick.


On 03/11/13 17:16, Benny Malengier wrote:

> Nick,
>
> Can you create an overview of the result of the poll? You send a list
> of committers off line, did most react?
>
> Going over the poll, it seems git would have a clear majority.
> Nevertheless, before moving, somebody should look into moving where?
> So SF or another place.
> And other work involved. Impact?
>
> As you volunteered, I will give you the task. A start would be to
> become admin on SF, you ok with that? As Doug and John offered their
> help, don't hesitate to take them up on it.
>
> Greetings,
> Benny


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Benny Malengier



2013/11/3 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
The poll results were as follows:

git - 8 (61.5%)    svn - 2 (15.4%)     Don't mind - 3 (23.1%)

We have already started to look into the impact of moving.

I'll also investigate alternative hosting options.  I don't mind becoming an admin on SF.

Ok, I see you are admin on SF, so or you were it, or Brian added you already. So, on the SF side, you should be able to set everything up.

Benny

 

Nick.



On 03/11/13 17:16, Benny Malengier wrote:
Nick,

Can you create an overview of the result of the poll? You send a list of committers off line, did most react?

Going over the poll, it seems git would have a clear majority. Nevertheless, before moving, somebody should look into moving where? So SF or another place.
And other work involved. Impact?

As you volunteered, I will give you the task. A start would be to become admin on SF, you ok with that? As Doug and John offered their help, don't hesitate to take them up on it.

Greetings,
Benny



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Nick Hall-6
In reply to this post by Benny Malengier
On 03/11/13 17:16, Benny Malengier wrote:
> And other work involved. Impact?

I have put a few notes together on a wiki page:

http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Conversion_from_Subversion_to_Git

Is there anything missing?

Nick.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Benny Malengier



2013/11/4 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
On 03/11/13 17:16, Benny Malengier wrote:
And other work involved. Impact?

I have put a few notes together on a wiki page:

http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Conversion_from_Subversion_to_Git

Is there anything missing?

I would suggest:

1.  trunk becomes master. Best to not drag old things with us of which we don't know the origin 5 years from now

2.  for svn: read only ok. Also, only people who reacted to the git mail poll keep commit rights. The rest has to reask, or we mail them explicitly to ask if they are still doing Gramps development. We need to reduce the access somewhat so as to know who all the people with access are, which due to the age of Gramps, we now don't know.

3. " Git does not pollute the source code tree " --> there is a .git in top directory though...

Benny



Nick.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Nick Hall-6
On 05/11/13 08:14, Benny Malengier wrote:
> I would suggest:
>
> 1.  trunk becomes master. Best to not drag old things with us of which
> we don't know the origin 5 years from now
>

I agree.


> 2.  for svn: read only ok.

Yes.  I was going to leave svn there as read-only for a while.

We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest
"core".

So we would have the following url:

http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core

Is this OK?


> Also, only people who reacted to the git mail poll keep commit rights.
> The rest has to reask, or we mail them explicitly to ask if they are
> still doing Gramps development. We need to reduce the access somewhat
> so as to know who all the people with access are, which due to the age
> of Gramps, we now don't know.

Shall I move the people not on the list from the "developer" to the
"member" group?


Nick.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Vassilii Khachaturov
On 05.11.2013 14:50, Nick Hall wrote:
> We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest
> "core".
>
> So we would have the following url:
>
> http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core
>
> Is this OK?
>
Wouldn't the virtual server different "Host: " header suffice to
differentiate between the svn and git? maybe you can keep /code for the
git URL?
Not a big issue anyway.

V

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Benny Malengier
In reply to this post by Nick Hall-6



2013/11/5 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
On 05/11/13 08:14, Benny Malengier wrote:
I would suggest:

1.  trunk becomes master. Best to not drag old things with us of which we don't know the origin 5 years from now


I agree.



2.  for svn: read only ok.

Yes.  I was going to leave svn there as read-only for a while.

We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest "core".

I would prefer source if not taken.
 

So we would have the following url:

http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core

Is this OK?



Also, only people who reacted to the git mail poll keep commit rights. The rest has to reask, or we mail them explicitly to ask if they are still doing Gramps development. We need to reduce the access somewhat so as to know who all the people with access are, which due to the age of Gramps, we now don't know.

Shall I move the people not on the list from the "developer" to the "member" group?

Yes, seems sensible.

Another issue, what with people who have local changes at this moment, eg for a gep branch.
I suppose:

1/ svn diff > mychanges.patch
2/ check out new git repo, go to correct branch, move your mychanges.patch file there
3/ patch -p0 < mychanges.patch
4/ git add .
5/ commit + push somewhere in the future when happy with changes

will be the way to go ?

Benny


Nick.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Nick Hall-6
On 05/11/13 13:16, Benny Malengier wrote:

> Another issue, what with people who have local changes at this moment,
> eg for a gep branch.
> I suppose:
>
> 1/ svn diff > mychanges.patch
> 2/ check out new git repo, go to correct branch, move your
> mychanges.patch file there
> 3/ patch -p0 < mychanges.patch
> 4/ git add .
> 5/ commit + push somewhere in the future when happy with changes
>
> will be the way to go ?
>

Yes.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Nick Hall-6
In reply to this post by Vassilii Khachaturov
On 05/11/13 12:55, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:

> On 05.11.2013 14:50, Nick Hall wrote:
>> >We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest
>> >"core".
>> >
>> >So we would have the following url:
>> >
>> >http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core
>> >
>> >Is this OK?
>> >
> Wouldn't the virtual server different "Host: " header suffice to
> differentiate between the svn and git? maybe you can keep /code for the
> git URL?
> Not a big issue anyway.

I tried using "code", but it is actually the mount point, so I got an error.

I'll use "source" instead.

Nick.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Benny Malengier



2013/11/5 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
On 05/11/13 12:55, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
> On 05.11.2013 14:50, Nick Hall wrote:
>> >We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest
>> >"core".
>> >
>> >So we would have the following url:
>> >
>> >http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core
>> >
>> >Is this OK?
>> >
> Wouldn't the virtual server different "Host: " header suffice to
> differentiate between the svn and git? maybe you can keep /code for the
> git URL?
> Not a big issue anyway.

I tried using "code", but it is actually the mount point, so I got an error.

I'll use "source" instead.

Should 4.0.2 not be released first, before git changes are done?

Jerome,  I was thinking the 3.4 release would have been followed by that. Is 4.0.2 not planned?

Benny
 

Nick.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

John Ralls-2

On Nov 5, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Benny Malengier <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
>
> 2013/11/5 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
> On 05/11/13 12:55, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
> > On 05.11.2013 14:50, Nick Hall wrote:
> >> >We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest
> >> >"core".
> >> >
> >> >So we would have the following url:
> >> >
> >> >http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core
> >> >
> >> >Is this OK?
> >> >
> > Wouldn't the virtual server different "Host: " header suffice to
> > differentiate between the svn and git? maybe you can keep /code for the
> > git URL?
> > Not a big issue anyway.
>
> I tried using "code", but it is actually the mount point, so I got an error.
>
> I'll use "source" instead.
>
> Should 4.0.2 not be released first, before git changes are done?

Why would it matter?

Regards,
John Ralls


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

jerome
In reply to this post by Benny Malengier

Benny,

We can plan it for end of the week? Friday ?
Note, I can try to use git.

I already moved some bug reports to 4.0.3.

But maybe some remaining issues[1] can be fixed before 4.0.2 release?
Or need to wait a fix for 6194: 
    Database corrupted - TypeError: unhashable type: 'list'[2].

Any idea for the release name[3]?

[1] http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/roadmap_page.php?version_id=43
[2] http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=6194
[3]
http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Previous_releases


Jérôme


Le mar. 5 nov. 2013 at 20:06,Benny Malengier
<[hidden email]> a écrit :

>
>
>
> 2013/11/5 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
>> On 05/11/13 12:55, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
>> > On 05.11.2013 14:50, Nick Hall wrote:
>> >> >We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I
>> suggest
>> >> >"core".
>> >> >
>> >> >So we would have the following url:
>> >> >
>> >> >http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core
>> >> >
>> >> >Is this OK?
>> >> >
>> > Wouldn't the virtual server different "Host: " header suffice to
>> > differentiate between the svn and git? maybe you can keep /code
>> for the
>> > git URL?
>> > Not a big issue anyway.
>>
>> I tried using "code", but it is actually the mount point, so I got
>> an error.
>>
>> I'll use "source" instead.
>>
>
> Should 4.0.2 not be released first, before git changes are done?
>
> Jerome,  I was thinking the 3.4 release would have been followed by
> that. Is 4.0.2 not planned?
>
> Benny
>  
>>
>> Nick.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
>> Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models.
>> Explore
>> techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get
>> the most
>> from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and
>> register
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gramps-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
>>
>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Benny Malengier
In reply to this post by John Ralls-2



2013/11/5 John Ralls <[hidden email]>

On Nov 5, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Benny Malengier <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
>
> 2013/11/5 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
> On 05/11/13 12:55, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
> > On 05.11.2013 14:50, Nick Hall wrote:
> >> >We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest
> >> >"core".
> >> >
> >> >So we would have the following url:
> >> >
> >> >http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core
> >> >
> >> >Is this OK?
> >> >
> > Wouldn't the virtual server different "Host: " header suffice to
> > differentiate between the svn and git? maybe you can keep /code for the
> > git URL?
> > Not a big issue anyway.
>
> I tried using "code", but it is actually the mount point, so I got an error.
>
> I'll use "source" instead.
>
> Should 4.0.2 not be released first, before git changes are done?

Why would it matter?

Release manager doesn't know git yet.

Benny



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

John Ralls-2
In reply to this post by jerome

On Nov 5, 2013, at 11:44 AM, Jerome <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Benny,
>
> We can plan it for end of the week? Friday ?
> Note, I can try to use git.

Jerome,

If you’re not familiar with using the git mirror, you probably shouldn’t try to do the release from it. It’s a bit complicated and you’d only be doing it that way the one time. Once the switch to git is made, the procedure will be:

git clone ssh://<username>@git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/source gramps
git branch -t gramps40 origin/maintenance/gramps40
git checkout gramps40
<run whatever checks you do before a release>
<update NEWS and anything else that needs it>
git commit -am “Release 4.0.2”
git tag -am “Tag 4.0.2” gramps-4.0.2
git push origin gramps-4.0.2
<bump the version in version.py>
git clean -fdx
<make the tarballs & .debs, upload to SF, tell me that it’s ready so that I can make the OSX packages, make the announcement>

Notes:
1. You need to fill in your username in the git clone url.
2. If you’d rather mimic the two-level branch structure in your local repo, you can call your gramps40 branch maintenance/gramps40; the branch command would be git branch -t gramps40 origin/maintenance/gramps40

Regards,
John Ralls
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Benny Malengier
In reply to this post by jerome
Best work with Nick on timing.
Fixing the 3.3 to 3.4 upgrade problem would be great, but it must be an outlier as this is the only person with such a bug report. On the other hand, if fixed shortly after release, it would be a reason to do again a release.... I leave it up to you.

Benny


2013/11/5 Jerome <[hidden email]>

Benny,

We can plan it for end of the week? Friday ?
Note, I can try to use git.

I already moved some bug reports to 4.0.3.

But maybe some remaining issues[1] can be fixed before 4.0.2 release?
Or need to wait a fix for 6194: 
    Database corrupted - TypeError: unhashable type: 'list'[2].

Any idea for the release name[3]?

[1] http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/roadmap_page.php?version_id=43
[2] http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=here in the code of upgrade, or in the code of 3.3, there is no unserialize on raw data. 6194
[3] http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Previous_releases


Jérôme


Le mar. 5 nov. 2013 at 20:06,Benny Malengier <[hidden email]> a écrit :




2013/11/5 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
On 05/11/13 12:55, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
> On 05.11.2013 14:50, Nick Hall wrote:
>> >We need a new mount point to use for git (svn uses "code").  I suggest
>> >"core".
>> >
>> >So we would have the following url:
>> >
>> >http://git.code.sf.net/p/gramps/core
>> >
>> >Is this OK?
>> >
> Wouldn't the virtual server different "Host: " header suffice to
> differentiate between the svn and git? maybe you can keep /code for the
> git URL?
> Not a big issue anyway.

I tried using "code", but it is actually the mount point, so I got an error.

I'll use "source" instead.


Should 4.0.2 not be released first, before git changes are done?
Jerome,  I was thinking the 3.4 release would have been followed by that. Is 4.0.2 not planned?

Benny
 

Nick.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel






------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

git and 4.0.2 release

jerome

Yes, everything is maybe not yet active?

I wanted to test ChangeLog file generation into a local copy of the git
repository, but 'git clone' command returns:
    warning: You appear to have cloned an empty repository.

About 4.0.2 release and bug reports.
I do not understand causes for:

* 6868: Pressing Tab in Name Editor causes an error
http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=6868

Is it specific to MacOSx bundle?

* 7024: view not refreshed upon deletion of Place record
http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=7024

I am not certain that it is specific to the place view?
but I did not try to reproduce it yet ...

* 7093: Error after creating Pedigree Chart Report
http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=7093

Is it related to GI or something around user's database?

Also, I should be (at least) able to provide a work around for:
* 7085: Gedcom export adds birth date to father from son of the same
name
http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=7085


Jérôme


Le mer. 6 nov. 2013 at 9:17,Benny Malengier <[hidden email]>
a écrit :

> Best work with Nick on timing.
> Fixing the 3.3 to 3.4 upgrade problem would be great, but it must be
> an outlier as this is the only person with such a bug report. On the
> other hand, if fixed shortly after release, it would be a reason to
> do again a release.... I leave it up to you.
>
> Benny
>
>
> 2013/11/5 Jerome <[hidden email]>
>>
>> Benny,
>>
>> We can plan it for end of the week? Friday ?
>> Note, I can try to use git.
>>
>> I already moved some bug reports to 4.0.3.
>>
>> But maybe some remaining issues[1] can be fixed before 4.0.2 release?
>> Or need to wait a fix for 6194: 
>>     Database corrupted - TypeError: unhashable type: 'list'[2].
>>
>> Any idea for the release name[3]?
>>
>> [1] http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/roadmap_page.php?version_id=43
>> [2] http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=here in the code
>> of upgrade, or in the code of 3.3, there is no unserialize on raw
>> data. 6194
>> [3]
>> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Previous_releases
>>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Serge Noiraud-2
In reply to this post by Benny Malengier
Le 05/11/2013 09:14, Benny Malengier a écrit :



2013/11/4 Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
On 03/11/13 17:16, Benny Malengier wrote:
And other work involved. Impact?

I have put a few notes together on a wiki page:

http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Conversion_from_Subversion_to_Git

Is there anything missing?

I would suggest:

1.  trunk becomes master. Best to not drag old things with us of which we don't know the origin 5 years from now

2.  for svn: read only ok. Also, only people who reacted to the git mail poll keep commit rights. The rest has to reask, or we mail them explicitly to ask if they are still doing Gramps development. We need to reduce the access somewhat so as to know who all the people with access are, which due to the age of Gramps, we now don't know.
So I need to react for this.
Personnaly I prefer svn as commit is in only one phase and git is a two phases commit.
On git you must commit to save your modifications in your local repository.
Then you must push to have your modifs on the master.

perhaps i miss something.

for me git or svn is not a problem.

3. " Git does not pollute the source code tree " --> there is a .git in top directory though...

Benny

Nick

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: git and 4.0.2 release

Nick Hall-6
In reply to this post by jerome
On 06/11/13 09:36, Jerome wrote:
> Yes, everything is maybe not yet active?
>
> I wanted to test ChangeLog file generation into a local copy of the
> git repository, but 'git clone' command returns:
>     warning: You appear to have cloned an empty repository.

It is just an empty repository at the moment.  To test git2cl you will
have to clone John's mirror.

You will need to do something like:

git log gramps-4.0.1.. --pretty --numstat --summary | git2cl > ChangeLog

and for the po directory:

git log gramps-4.0.1.. --pretty --numstat --summary -- po | git2cl >
po/ChangeLog

Commit hashes will not be included in the output, but svn revision
number will be part of the commit messages.

I also notice that git2cl only outputs commit dates, rather than a date
and time.

Regards,


Nick.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: To git or not to git

Adam Stein-3
In reply to this post by Serge Noiraud-2
On 11/06/2013 6:43 am, Serge Noiraud wrote:

> Le 05/11/2013 09:14, Benny Malengier a écrit :
>
>> 2013/11/4 Nick Hall <[hidden email] [2]>
>>
>>> On 03/11/13 17:16, Benny Malengier wrote:
>>>
>>>> And other work involved. Impact?
>>>
>>> I have put a few notes together on a wiki page:
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Conversion_from_Subversion_to_Git
>>> [1]
>>>
>>> Is there anything missing?
>>
>> I would suggest:
>>
>> 1.  trunk becomes master. Best to not drag old things with us of
>> which we don't know the origin 5 years from now
>>
>> 2.  for svn: read only ok. Also, only people who reacted to the
>> git mail poll keep commit rights. The rest has to reask, or we mail
>> them explicitly to ask if they are still doing Gramps development.
>> We need to reduce the access somewhat so as to know who all the
>> people with access are, which due to the age of Gramps, we now don't
>> know.
>  So I need to react for this.
>  Personnaly I prefer svn as commit is in only one phase and git is a
> two phases commit.
>  On git you must commit to save your modifications in your local
> repository.
>  Then you must push to have your modifs on the master.
>
>  perhaps i miss something.

The positive aspect is that you can commit your changes without
affecting anybody else.  Therefore, you can commit while in the middle
of a project and not push until the project is fully done.


>  for me git or svn is not a problem.
>
>> 3. " Git does not pollute the source code tree " --> there is a
>> .git in top directory though...
>>
>> Benny
>>
>>> Nick
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
>
> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Conversion_from_Subversion_to_Git
> [2] mailto:[hidden email]


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers
Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore
techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most
from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
12